4 3S 




Class ^4-M. 



THE TERRITORIAL SLAVE POLICY; THE REPUBLICAN PARTY; 
WHAT THE NORTH HAS TO DO WITH SLAVERY. 



SPEECH 






OP 



HON. THOMAS D. ELIOT, OF MASS. 



Delivered in the House of Representatives, April 25, 1860. 



-o 



The Houso being in the Committee of the Whole en the | 
state of the Union — 

Mr. ELIOT said : 

1 desire, Mr. Chairman, to address an argu- 
ment to the Committee this morning on the slave 
territorial policy of the present Administration. 
I desire to speak upon that subject which, as 
has beeii truly said by several gentlemen, draw^s 
to itself all questions besides. And I wish to 
speak to that particular phase of the question, 
because it is one which must enter into the delib- 
erations of the people, into the action of the 
freemeti of this land. North and South, during 
the coming canvass for the Presidency. That 
territorial slave policy is at conflict with the 
theory of the Government and with the princi- 
ples of the fathers ; and it ignores and discards 
rights which have heretofore been recognised, 
conceded, and acted upon, during the entire his- 
tory of our National Government, down to the 
Administration that preceded that of Mr. Bu- 
chanan. Out of that policy, and as one necessary 
result of it, the Republican party of this Union 
has sprung into existence. 

To restrain slavery within its present limits ; to 
keep it within the States whose laws recognise it; 
to prevent its expansion ; to exclude itfrom the Ter- 
ritories ; to keep it from being a blight upon the free 
lands of the United States, is the confessed duty 
of that party. And there are convincing reasons, 
social, moral, and political, why that duty should 
be performed. Il was said here the other day, 
by the gentleman from Georgia, [Mr. Love,] that 
so far as that question was to be considered in 
its political and in its moral aspects, it was fair- 
ly a subject for discussion upon the floor of Con- 
gress. But in the course of his argument, certain 
facts were stated, and certain statistics given, to 
■which I desire, in the course of my remarks, to 
call the attention of the Committee. 

Mr. LOVE. I understand the gentleman to say 
that I admitted that that question was properly 
discussable in this House, in its moral and its 
social relations. 

Mr. ELIOT. Moral and political. 
Mr. LOVE. I wish to correct the gentleman 
in that respect. I did say then, and I do say 
now, that it is proper and legitimate to discuss 
that question politically here or elsewhere. 

Mr. ELIOT. I said nothing about its social 
aspects. 1 do not propose to discuss them. I 
am willing, however, to discuss the question 
■upoa either ground — social, moral, or political. 



Mr. Chairman, this question now before the 
American people, demanding adjustment, is one 
of protection. If Mr. Jefferson could be heard 
now in these Halls, his own words would echo 
back to him, and he would declare it to be one 
of protection to that life and liberty and pursuit 
of happiness with which he boldly taught that 
all men were endowed, as with 'inalienable 
rights. 

Whatever public interest calls for considera- 
tion, whether it be one of revenue or of educa- 
tion, of our relations with foreign nations, of 
commerce between the States, of internal im- 
provements, of national justice, of domestic 
tranquillity, for common defence, or the promo- 
tion of our general welfare, the same great ques- 
tion faces us as we legislate, demanding discus- 
sion and adjustment, as the condition of legisla- 
tive action. From time to time, that question 
has presented itself to the statesmen of this land, 
in different forms, according to the exigencies, 
real or supposed, of Southern interests ; for it is 
a political truth that our history demonstrates, 
that when one position or principle or policy has 
been advocated and sustained and secured by 
the political advocates of human slavery, a step 
in advance has been forthwith taken, and, as 
soon as taken, defended and insisted on, as 
though the last doctrine advanced were the ver- 
itable principle and policy of the fathers. Such 
has been the Russian career of the slave power — 
autocratic always — yielding nothing unless, by 
seeming concession, a substantial vantage 
ground for future attack was thereby secured. 

It is now but about twenty years since first, in 
Congress, an intimation was made, by legislative 
resolution, that the slaveholder, under the pro- 
tection of the Constitution, might eavry his hu- 
man chattels into the Territories of the Union, 
in defiance of the action of Congress. 

On the 19th of February, 1847, Mr. Calhoun 
ofiFered in the Senate four resolutions, and they 
are now the basis and the substance of the Dem- 
ocratic creed. 

The first three of those resolutions are as fol- 
lows : 

<• Reinlved, That the Territories of the United States belong 
to tlie soveriil States comprising this Union, anil arc hold by 
tlieni as llieir .joint iiuil commou properly. 

" H/solvcd, Tli.1t Congress, ns the joint agent and repre- 
sentative of the States of the Union, has no right to mnkc 
.any luw, or do any act wh.itever, that shall directly, or by 
its cirocts, make any di-'criinination between the Stiites of 
this Union, by which any of thwm shaM bo dcprivci of ita 



full and equal right in any Territory of the United SUxtos, 
acquired or to bo acquired. 

" Hesnlvedjllvdl the enactment of any law which should 
directly, or by its effects, deprive the citizens of any of the 
States ul this Union from emigrating with their property into 
any of the Territories of the United States, will make such 
discrimination, and would thoroforo bo a violation of the 
Constitntion, and the rights of the States from which such 
citizens emigrated, and in derogation of that perfect equality 
which belongs to them as mombersof this Union, and would 
tend directly to subvert the Union itself." 

Mr. Benton, upon the spot, condemned these 
resolutions as a " string of abstractions ; " atid 
during the conversation that ensued between 
him and Mr. Calhoun, he said that Mr. Calhoun 
must have known, from his whole course in pub- 
lic life, that he never would "leave public busi- 
ness to take up firebrands to set the world on 
fire." 

To-day, standing upon that bold and unheard- 
of doctrine ; standing upon it as upon the broad 
foundation of our liberties which the fathers 
laid ; sustained by a false and partisan and law- 
leas declaration of certain men clothed with the 
ermine of our highest judicial tribunal, the Pres- 
ident of the United States declares to us, in his 
message to the present Congress, that 

" The right has been established of every cJtizen to take 
his properly of any kind, including slaves, into the common 
Territories, belonging equally to all the States of the Confed- 
eracy, and to have it protected there under the Federal Con- 
stitution. Neither. Congress, nor a Territorial Legislalare, 
nor any human power, has any authority to annul or to im- 
pair this vested right." 

And that is the politic.-.! phase now assumed 
by that question which demands adjustment by 
the freemen of this Union. 

If now we go back for s, few years, it is easy 
to see how the Southern Democratic party, sus- 
tained by Northern friends under the lead of a 
Northern President, and the false and treacherous 
counsellings of a Northern Senator, have forced 
into life, and combined into a solid and over- 
powering organization, the Republican party of 
the Union. Sir, during all the weary weeks that 
preceded the organization of this House, while 
the confusion of tongues prevailed, and our tor- 
tured language was made the unnatural vehicle 
of anathema and abuse against men who were 
representing upon this floor the " sentiment" for 
which the fathers contended— during all those 
weeks, when the red hand of the South seemed 
to be raised in menace against us, and the voice 
of disunion, unchecked and applauded even, 
echoed madly in these Halls, one great fact was 
always recognised, the fact of this national power 
which was tauntingly, but harmlessly, styled the 
" Black " Republican party. If any man can pa- 
tiently work his way through those harangues 
"to the country"— where the main and con- 
trolling end and aim appeared to be, not to con- 
vince, but to inflame ;• not to persuade, but to 
enracre constituencies already too much and too 
wildfy excited— he will be struck, as I was, who 
hoard them, with the manifest sense of national 
greatness with which that Republican party had 
impressed the Democracy of the South. It was 
the premonition of coming defeat, and not the 
"Helper book," which lashed into fury the 
champions of Southern slavery ; and yet, if a 
constitutional majority, iu a constitutional man- 
ner and form, shall enable that political party to 
inaugurate in these modern times an Adminis- 
tration that shall claim to represent the policy 
of Washington, and to carry out into effective 



reality some of the ardent yearnings of the heart 
of Jefferson, I apprehend that no man will rise 
on this floor and say to us that a way will not 
be found to meet the crisis according to the law 
in such case provided. 

Mr. Chairman, when the theory of Mr. Cal- 
houn was becoming crystallized into a political 
creed, the possibility of a Republican party be- 
came a necessity. At that time, two great par- 
ties — the Whig and the Democratic organiza- 
tions — contended for political power; and these 
resolutions of Mr. Calhoun contributed greatly 
to disquiet the public mind of the whole North. 
The " firebrand " took effect. The millions of 
men in the non-slaveholding States were con- 
founded at the bold advance of the slave power. 
Distinguished Democratic politicians perceived 
at once that such new aggressions of the South 
would make them all slaves, by a logical neces- 
sity, if such doctrines were admitted as Demo- 
cratic, and the party which announced them 
should have power to vitalize them by legisla- 
tive laws. In many of the Northern States, in 
caucus and in Convention, resolutions were 
adopted by both political parties, to the end that 
the men enrolled under their banners who loved 
freedom, and believed in its nationality; who 
dreaded the slave law and the slave trade, and 
the institution they fostered ; and who believed 
as Washington and his co-patriots, in the Senate 
and in the field, at the South and at the North, 
believed, that it must be restricted, anq, that it 
ought to be abolished — to the end that such men 
should be retained within their ranks, resolu- 
tions were adopted declaring in advance the 
substantial doctrines of our Republican party as 
their true and accepted faith. For, Mr. Chair- 
man, it was beginning to be felt that sober and 
thinking men, who had not been politicians, were 
getting to be alarmed. Third parties were be- 
coming strong ; and both the Whig party and 
the Democratic party found it to be expedient, 
for th ;ir own preservation, and to conciliate the 
growing discontent among themselves, to put 
upon the record their opinions upon subjects 
that were assuming such alarming significance 
in the popular mind. 

Sir, if the newspapers of that period should be 
consulted, it would be found that the Northern 
Democrat of the straitest sect— brought up at 
the feet of Gamaliel himself— iu State Conven- 
tion, would rival the Whig of most anti-slavery 
proclivities in the art of framing resolutions m 
defence of freedom. I do not stop to prove by 
historic reference— it could not be done in the 
hour you assign lae— the truth of what I say. 
But there are men now on this floor. Republican 
Representatives, then belonging to both parties, 
who can attest its truth. We were actors and ob- 
servers, and I am speaking of what I know. Then 
came the session of the compromises. Mr. Calhoun 
had, three years before, denouuced; all compro- 
mises He did not believe in them, when principles 
were involved. It would have been better for all 
of us, perhaps, on both sides of the House, if some 
of those measures, which together were styled the 
compromises, had never become laws, but it 
did at one time seem that the " conflict, so far 
as it depended upon the action of the two con- 
trolling parties in the country, was to be re- 
pressed. 



I do not mean to say, nor to permit it for a 
moment to be supposed, that I approved of the 
whole legishxtioa of 1S50, or of the subsequent 
political action of either of those parlies resjiect- 
ing it. I speak now as an individual, and not 
for any party. There are different opinions and 
various judgments here upon this side of the 
House regarding it. The honorable gentleman 
from Ohio [Mr. Coitwis'] has taken occasion to 
restate his approval of one of those measures, 
known as the fugitive slave act, which were 
placed as laws upon the statute books of Con- 
gress while he was a distinguished member of 
Sir. Fillmore's Cabinet. Other gentlemen have 
stated, in more or less general phrase, their wil- 
lingness to submit to what was done. I cannot, 
as a legislator, assent to their opinions. What- 
ever we may do, or whatever we may feel bound 
not to do, as citizens, we stand here in Congress 
clothed with higher power, and burdened with 
different duties. I prefer the doctrine of Mr. 
Buchanan, not the President, but the Senator. 
I appeal from Jlr. Buchanan in the White House 
to Mr. Buchanan in the Senate. Hear what he 
said, speaking upon the bank question, in the 
Senate, in July, 18-il: 

'• Now, if it were not unparfiamontary language, and it I 
did not desire to treat all my friends on this [Whig] side of 
the House with tlie respect" which I feel for them, I would 
Bay that the idea of the question having been settled so as to 
bind the cotiscicnces of members of Confess, when voting on 
the present bill, is ridiruJous arul absurd. If oil the judges 
and all the lawyers in Christendom had decided in the alfirm- 
ative, when the question is thus brought home to one as a 
legislator, bound to vote lor or ;igainst a new cluirtor, upon 
oath to support the C(inslitutiou,/»t,«^-« exercise my iwmjmif/- 
titent. I would treat witlx profound respect the arguments 
and opinions of judges and constitutional lawyers; but if, 
after all, they fail to convince me that the law was constitu- 
tional, I should be guilty of perjury before high Heaven if I 
voted in its favor. 

"But even if the Judiciary had settled the question, I 
should never hold myself bound by their decision whil(^ act- 
ing in a legislative character. Unlilic the Senator from 
Mass-ichusetts, [llr. Bates, i I shall never consent to place the 
UbertUs of the people in the hatuls of any judicial tribunal. 

" No man holds in liigher esteem than I do the memory 
of Chief Justice M:irt--liall ; but I should never have ctnuenlcdi" 
make even him the final arbiter liettueen the (lox-emmenl arul the 
people of this country on qu&itions <f ajnstiluiional liberty." 

My own examination ofthe constitutional power 
of Congress to pass the act of 1850 has induced 
a conviction that I am unable to surrender; and 
independent of the peculiar provisions of that 
act, which seemed to me at the time of its enact- 
ment to characterize it as a law unfit for the ap- 
proval of civilized and Christian lawgivers, it 
has seemed clear lo me, that when the several 
States adopted, as a bond of common union, the 
provisions of our Federal Constitution, it was 
not within their intent to confer upon Congress 
the power which such legislation involves. 

But T go further back than the gentleman from 
Ohio [Mr. Sherman] did yesterday, and would 
be willing, altogether, to meet the gentleman 
from Virginia, who discussed one portion of the 
act of 1850, and discuss the question with him. 
If the question were a new and open one now ; 
if the right under the Constitution to pass any 
law, either that of 1793 or that of 1850, could 
be argued in the Congress of the United States, 
I think that all constitutional lawyers must 
come together upon ihat proposition. All that 
can be said now is, that an early Congress, after 
the adoption of the Constitution, passed an act; 
that the Supreme Court have decided upon its 



constitutionality ; that the courts of the various 
States have sustained it ; that the legislation of 
1850 is claimed to be in pursuance of it; and 
because of the action of Congress and of the Ju- 
diciary, that the question ought to be deemed 
and taken to be settled. 

That doctrine was not the doctrine which con- 
mended itself to Mr. Buchanan, for he said, and 
said well, that he was unwilling that the liber- 
ties of the people should rest in the judicial tri- 
bunals ofthe country. But when, in the course 
of time, the judicial tribunals came to say that 
the negro has no rights the white man is bound 
to respect; when, going out of their proper 
sphere, outside of the case before them, they 
sought to pass upon a question of constitutional 
law, then the President, forgetful of the past, 
and of his early love and reverence for the lib- 
erties of the people, is willing to endorse the doc- 
trine ofthe Supreme Court, and to declare to us 
that the question is settled, and that now no power 
upon earth. Congressional, territorial, or judicial, 
can affect the right of the slaveholder to carry 
his slave within the Territories ofthe Union. 

Sir, I do not care to stop now to discuss the 
question of the constitutionality of that law. I 
should not have felt myself called upon to refer 
to it at all, except for the fact that several gen- 
tlemen upon this side of the House have thought 
it proper for them to say that, in their judgment, 
the law was constitutional. The Republican 
party, it is true, has nothing, as a party, to do 
with it; but I felt unwilling to let this occasion 
pass, and have it for a moment supposed that I 
concurred in the opinion to which I have alluded. 
Nor do I feel at all willing to rest under the sug- 
gestions which have been made the other day, in 
regard to the question of slavery in the District of 
Columbia. I speak as a man, as an individual, 
as the representative of no party ; but I love 
this District with the affection of a child. Du- 
ring my early years here, I learned my lesson 
from books ; during my boyhood here, I listened 
to the eloquence of men from the North and 
South ; and I tell you it would be a proud and 
happy day to me, could I aid the men of this 
District to strike off the shackles from the slaves. 
It would be a glad day to me, could I aid them 
under the law, and under the Constitution that 
covers us all, in that most happy work. 

No, sir, I could not agree that I would not vote 
for the abolition of slavery in this District. We 
shall see that time, my friends. Ought we not 
to do so, when the laws are brought to bear 
here to suppress free speech? Were I to say 
outside what I am saying here, I ask what se- 
curity I have that I should not be put under 
bonds to keej) the peace? I might be put under 
bonds, were I to say in this capital of the nation 
that I should not be afraid to defend John 
Brown. I tell gentlemen such things cannot 
happtn without attracting the attention of the 
whole land. 

But, .Mr. Chairman, I am a<lmonir!iied that my 
lime is passing. These compromise mcivfurcs 
were incorporated among our laws. How long 
the apparent peace would have been real, no one 
can delermiiie. But we all know how the war 
began again, and from what quarter the decla- 
ration of hostilities was made. It was reserved 
for the Senator from Illinois to marshal and to 



conduct the army of the South to what seemed 
a yictory, but will prove a sacrifice of the party 
which followed him so valiantly and fought so 
well. It is only a question of time. But that 
violation of honor and of compact, consummated 
by the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska bill, fol- 
lowed quickly, as it has been, by territorial out- 
rages and by judicial or extra-judicial action, as 
surely indicates that the party must die, as the 
axe at the root of the settler's tree foretells its 
fall. At once, the anti-slavery sentiment of the 
whole nation was aroused. It was felt and pro- 
claimed here in Congress, that no compromises 
could be relied on. Those who had sustained the 
action of 1850 declared themselves fully exon- 
erated from that day, and political aspirants for 
the power which the people hold in their own 



gift, as well as the thinking and reflecting men 
all over the land who sought no political ad- 
vancement, united in condemning the Democratic I States was at that time a Virginian 
rescission of the line of freedom as a wanton | that words were sometimes things 



Gentlemen, that remains to be proved. But 
surely it is time to discontinue these threats of 
disunion. T wonder if gentlemen remember 
when these threats began. There is nothing in 
them new or original. I will give you one of 
early date. The following notice was published 
in a Virginia paper, under date of July 31, 1795 : 

" Notice is hereby given, that in case the treaty entered 
into by that damned arch traitor, John Jay, with the British 
tyrant, should bo ratiflod, a petition will be presented to the 
next General Assembly of Virginia, at their next session, 
praying that the said State may reo'^d'; from the Union, and 
be under the government of ouo hundred thousand free and 
independent Virginians. 

■' r. S. As it is the wish of the people of the said State to 
enter into a treaty of amity, commerce, and navigation, with 
any State or SUites of the present Union, who are averse to 
returning agam under the galling yoke of Great Britain, the 
printers of the (at present) United Stales are rocjuestod to 
publish the above notification. 

" Richmond, July 31, 1795." 

Mr. Chairman, the President of the United 

He knew 
He knew 



and gratuitous aggression of the Southern in- 
terest, in defiance of a compact whose consid- 
eration had been fully enjoyed. 

From that moment, the Republican party came 
into conscious life. The people demanded it. 
And the people intend that the party shall do its 
proper work. It is not a work of aggression, but 
of defence. But no threat can intimidate, and 
no denunciation can repress it. The simple 
truth is, that the people of the United States de- 
mand that the theory of this Government sh.all 
be carried into practice. The theory of the Gov- 
ernment is anti-slavery. The Government is pro- 
slavery. The free people of the United States 
demand that the rights of the slaveholder shall 
be recognised only where the State laws recog- 
nise them. The Government has declared that 
those rights exist, without law; that wherever 
the master leads his slave upon the lands of the 
United States, and witliin the Territories of the 
Union, there the rights of the master must be 
protected under the Constitution. And, what is 
still more bold and daring, the Southern Demo- 
cratic statesman avows, and the Northern Presi- 
dent declares, that no power upon the earth — 
not the people within the Territory, nor the Con- 
gress of the United States, nor any other tribu- 
nal, legislative or judicial — can do an act, or say 
an effective word, to interfere with or diminish 
the vested rights of the sovereigns of the land to 
carry their vassal slaves where they will, within 
the public lands or the organized Territories of 
the Union. Nor is this the whole that must be 
said now to the slave power of the Government 
and its supporters. 

The Southern party, sectional always, is not 
content with argument. The Representatives 
upon this floor have not stopped upon logic, or I 
rested upon the reason of their faith. Their 
modest proposition is : " We are right, and you 
are wrong. You must disband, no matter 
whether you represent a majority or a minority 
of the people of the United States ; but if you 
do not disband, and let us keep the Government 
and its patronage and power, we will shatter 
the Union, and destroy, if we cannot govern, 
the United States. The election of a Republican 
President is of itself an act of such aggression 
upon our vested rights that we will not submit to 
the deep disgrace involved in its consummation." 



that certain words a brother Virginian had re- 
cently uttered, declaring certain inalienable 
rights which man had received from God, were 
words which were full of life, and could impart 
life. But he was a man not of action only, but 
of intuition ; and he knew that words were 
sometimes vox et pretcrea nihil, and the treaty 
was ratified which John Adams and Benjamin 
Franklin and John Jay had made. And the 
Union did not slide ; and the one hundred thou- 
sand free and independent Virginians remained 
within the Union, free and independent still. 

Mr. Chairman, we all know something of the 
history of John Jay, that arch traitor! He waa 
a Blai-k Republican ; that is what John Jay was. 
But Washington rather liked him; for he was 
a good deal of a Black Republican also I Wash- 
ington offered him any office that he desired. 
And it will not be forgotten that he was the 
first man who filled the office of Chief Justice 
of the Supreme Court of the United States. 
There have been few men iu that chair since 
his appointment who have been his equals. 
Indeed, the history of that court will show that, 
with the exception of a very few years, that 
ofifice has been filled by three men— Jay, Mar- 
shall, and Taney. Do you think that Jay would 
have endorsed the message of the President to 
us ? No, sir ; he was too arch a traitor, I fear. 
Hear him : 

" Little can be added to what has boon said and written 
on th(; subject of slavery. I concur iu the opuuon that it 
ouiiht not to bo introdacod nor permitted m any ol Uie 
new States, and that it ought to be gradually dmimished 
and tinallv abolished in all of theiu. To me, the constitu- 
tional authority of Congress to prohibit the migration and 
importation of slaves into any of the Suites does not appear 
questionable. The first article of the Constitution specilies 
til" legislative powers committed to the Congress. The ninth 
section of that article has these words : ' The migration or 
importation of such persons as any of the now existing States 
shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the 
Congress prior to the year 1SU8. .But a Ux or duty rnay be 
imix-sed on such importations, not exceeding ten dollars lor 
each person.' »„ v, 

'• I undersund the sense and moaning of this clause to De, 
f 



that the power of the &)Bgress, although competent to pro- 
hibit tlie migration and importation, was not to be exercisea 
with respect to the then existing States (and those only) 
until the year 1808 ; but that the Congress were at liberty 
to make such prohibition as t.^ any new State which mignt 
m the mean time, be establLshed ; and further, that fioin 
and after that period, they were authorized to niako such 
prohibition as to all the SUtes, whether new or old. It w U, 
I presume, be admitted that slaves were the Pf"'«f °; 
tended. The word slaves was avoided probably on account 



of the exiBtias toleration of slavery, and of discordancy with 
tlie principles of the Revoliilicm, and from the consciou.sQi;s.s 
of its being rcpugnuut (o the followiug positions in the Dec- 
laration of Independence : ' We hold these truths lo be self- 
evident — that all men are created equal ; that they are en- 
dowed by their Creator with certain nialionable rights ; that 
among them are life, liberty, and the pursuit of h.^ppiuess." 

Sir, these doctrines, of John Jay, as they pre- 
ceded, so they will outlive, the modern doctrines 
recently declared by the successors of John Jay, 
from the same chair. 

Mr. MAYNARD. Will the gentleman tell us 
from what authority he is reading? 

Mr. ELIOT. I am reading from what I believe 
to be an extract from Mr. Jay's writings. 

Mr. MAYXARD. But which of Jay's writings 
is the extract taken from ? 

Mr. ELIOT. If the gentleman will call upon 
me by-and-by, I will go into the library with him, 
and endeavor to satisfy him. 

Mr. MAYNARD. I was asking not for my own 
individual ueueflt, but for the benefit of the coim- 
try, which listens Vith pleasure to our speeches. 
Mr. ELIOT. The gentleman says he does not 
ask for his own benefit, but for the benefit of 
others who are ignorant. Now, if the gentleman 
knows where to find it, I will not stop at this time 
to instruct these ignorant people while my friend 
is himself quite familiar with the fact. 

Mr. Chairman, at this time, when the freemen 
ia all the States of this Confederacy are pre[)aring 
to inaugurate a new Administration, it is of some 
importance to determine by the record who the 
men are that mean to enforce the principles of 
the fathers, and who they are that disregard 
and nullify them. 

The Democatic party proposes to elect a Presi- 
dent upon a Southern platform. The Republi- 
can party proposes to elect a President upon a 
platform that was consecrated by the founders of 
the Government, and upon principles that have 
been always recognised until desperate counsels 
compelled "revolutionary action, and political 
heresies have come to be regarded as the truth 
of history. There is not one doctrine of the Re- 
publican party that does not find its origin in 
the confessed and rtc irded judgment of the wise 
statesmen who decreed that it had been " the 
pride and boast of America, that the rights for 
which she contended were the rights of human 
nature." 

There is not one doctrine of the Southern party 
which we deny, so far as it concerns the vital 
question of human freedom, that does not conflict 
with the declared faith of the very men who are 
vouched as their ancient teachers and guides. 
■■ Let us see how true these propositions are. It 
P" is wholly in vain for politicians from the North 
or the South to discharge their anathemas 
against the historic scripture which has come 
down to us from the prophets of the past. 

Our earliest legislative anti-slavery society 
was our first Continental Congress. On the 5ih 
of September, 17M, they sought to prohibit the 
import acd purchase of slavus after the fir.st day 
of December, 1771, and to decree, by an article 
of their association, that they would discontinue 
the slave trade, and neither be concerned in it 
themselves, nor hire vessels nor sell commodi- 
ties to such as were concerned in it. On the I'Jth 
of April, 1784, the first Territorial report was 
made. Mr. Jetlerson, of Virginia, and Mr. Chase, 



of Maryland, were two of the three raembera of 
the committee who made the report. By the 
terms of that report, it was provided that, after 
1800, 

" No .slavery nor involuntary servitude .-ihould exi.st in any 
of the saiil States, otlierwise than initio punishment of crimes, 
wliereof th'' party shall liavo been convicted to be person- 
ally guilty." 

This report covered all cessions made and an- 
ticipated, and called for a division of the whole 
land into seventeen States, of which eight were 
to be below the falls of the Ohio, and nine above 
them. The report referred to them as " States," 
although then existing as Territories. Six States 
and sixteen members voted for this report, and 
three States and seven members voted against 
it. The Articles of Confederation required nine 
States to vote affirmatively, and therefore the 
proposition did not succeed. Mr. Jellerson, of 
Virginia, and Mr. Spaight, of North Carolina, 
voted in the aflirmative. Three years after ttaA, 
the ordinance of Nathan -Dane was passed, for 
the government of the Northwestern Territories, 
embodying the anti-slavery clause in the lan- 
guage of Mr. Jefferson. It will be remembered 
that, at this time, North and South Carolina 
and Georgia had not ceded the territories within 
their boundaries to the United States. 

During this same year, 1787, the Constitution 
of the United States was adopted, and by the 
several States it was afterwards ratified. No ar- 
gument is required to prove that the statesmen 
who assumed to control the question of slavery 
in the Territories at that day were not the advo- 
cates of the principles of the Cincinnati platform, 
and could not have assented to the proposed 
doctrines of 18ti0. 

By the terms of the cessions made by Georgia 
and North and South Carolina, the Territories 
ceded were to remain slave Territories ; and 
therefore, Tennessee, Mississippi, and Alabama, 
became slave States. But no statesman of that 
day contended that Congress had not the power 
to protect the magnificent wilderness of the 
Northwest from the baleful effects of domestic 
slavery. That is the doctrine of Mr. Calhoun, 
and of more recents converts to principles which 
Mr. Benton prophetically ciUled "firebrands." 
It is one of the purposes of the Republican par- 
ty to extinguish those firebrands forever. 

Mr. Chairman, the territorial policy initiated 
before the adoption of the Constitution in 1784, 
and recognised by the action of 1787, nas main- 
tained unswervingly and unques'ioned until 
about the period of Mr. Calhoun's resolutions, 
in 1347. That policy has bt-en confirraeil by 
sixty-three ye;\r3 of substantial national legisla- 
tion, initialed by the South, approved, main- 
tained, and enforced, by the South. But, ia 
these latter days, we of the Republican party are 
notifidd that if we do not rPi)iulialo and abandon 
that doctrine which lies at the fonnd.ttion of our 
political organization, and especially if we shall 
make the doctrine incarnate in a Ri'publican 
President, wo must carry on the Government, if 
wc can, without the countenance of Southern 
men. 

Now, sir, it is a fact that, by nearly all the lead- 
ing statesmen, and by every political Adminis- 
tration, without a single exception, down to that 
which preceded the Administration of Mr. Bu- 



6 



chanan, the policy of intervention for freedom 
was enforced. No man can disprove that prop- 
osition. The written history of the Government 
declares its truth. In some form or other, the 
right of Congress to act in the Territories to- 
wards the restriction of human slavery will be 
found to have been asserted. Before 1820, this 
policy had been settled, and the constitutional 
power upon which it rested had been repeatedly 
recognised. And in that year, the compromise 
which the South advocated, and which the North 
resisted at first, and then yielded to, was effected, 
under which Missouri became a State. 

In IV 98, the importation of slaves from abroad 
into the Southern Territories was forbidden. 

In 1803, the Territory of Indiana was forbid- 
den to hold slaves. 

In 1804, restrictive legislation was applied to 
the Territory now included in the State of Louis- 
iana: 

I do not propose to defend the principle upon 
which the Missouri line was established in 1820. 
It was one of the compromises which the North 
made for the sake of peace, but out of which no 
permanent peace has come. 

Gentlemen upon the other side of the Houce 
have declaimed, with earnestness, and with ap- 
pearance of sincerity, against what they call the 
aggressions of the North ; but they fail to show 
upon what historic ground these charges rest. 
From the beginning, the men of the North and 
of the great West, which New England blood and 
Northern institutions have so largely contributed 
to form, have been opposed to the extension of 
human slavery. Within their States they have 
protected their own citizens, especially since the 
act of 1850 made legislation necessary, by euch 
laws as they judged sufficient for the purpose. 
Whether at any time any provision of any law 
infringed in any respect upon the Federal Con- 
stitution, or the laws fairly passed by Congress, 
by virtue of powers conferred upon it, has always 
and everywhere among us been held a fit sub- 
ject for judicial decision. Upon a proper case, 
legitimately brought before our courts, there 
never, within my knowledge, has been hesitation 
on the part of Northern judges to meet and to 
decide upon the binding force of any statute 
whose constitutional foundation had been called 
in question. The liberty laws of Massachusetts, 
and of other New England States, have been in- 
voked in the discussions we have listened to, 
and their provisions made the subject of fierce 
and angry comment. 

Mr. Chaiimau, this is not the tribunal beforo wliich I 
choose to maintain the right of Massncluisctti? t<j enact any 
law-s that are found upon hor rccor<is. Tliat Commonwealth 
i.')- not to be brought to the bar of Congress t« answer lor her 
legislation. But what I me;in to say is this — and because it 
is an answer to the charge of aggression, I find it within the 
lino of my argument to say it — that the example was set by 
Southern" StaU'S of passing State laws to protect. Southern in- 
stitutions and Southern citizens. They have no right to crit- 
icise, in that respect, the action of the North. But, sir, when 
the courts of the South are open; as those of the North al- 
ways are, to the freest intpiiry and the fullest latitude of ex- 
amination ; when the rights "of free discussion and of ftec 
speech are acknowledged, not by word of mouth, but in 
deed and truth, it will be time enough for us to compare and 
to contrast with them our several laws. But whether a 
particular State law is wisely or unwisely enacted, at the 
South or at the North, there is no logic nor common sense in 
saying that thereby the institutions of oUier States are at- 
tacked. The legislation of each State is for the citizens of 
that State, and those who bring themselves within its juris- 
dictioh. 



But it is said that men in the freo States road and write, 
and discuss questions of human freedom, and hold public 
meetings, and pvss resolutions ; and that the free press 
spreads before the world the arguments advanced to prove 
that Irien of whatsoever color are to be regarded as men, 
and not as the beast.s that perish. So they do. So they al- 
ways have. So they always will. 

The right of free discussion is claimed in every State within 
our Confederacy. The exercise of that right must, perhaps 
of necessity, be aflfected, qualified, controlled, in a degree, 
by the character of the social or domoslio institutions within 
the State. If a S(nithern Legislature judge it tu bo unsafe, 
conducive to insurrectionary violence, to permit me to de- 
clare publicly within that State the opinions which I hold 
upon the subject of slavery, and sliall pass a law prohibiting 
such discussion within that Slate, I have no right to violate 
that law. It is plain enough that free speech is, to thai ex- 
tent, controlled. If a Northern Legislature, for reasons of 
State policy or necessity, should prohibit the dissemination 
of doctrines subversive of the laws of God , to that extent the 
right of tree speech would also be controlled. But if, in a 
Northern State, a man should disobey, claiming that Die law 
itself was in violation of his constitutional rights, ho would 
act at his peril, but it would be a peril uyider the law. He 
might discuss its constitutionality with perfect safety. If the 
law were sustained, punishment would tdlow his o.tenco. 
That ho would expect. If not sustained, his right of free 
speech would bo vindicated. No gentleman will say , I think, 
that a like security would be afforded in a Southern Stat*. 
Well, sir, let it be so. Forbid discussion by law, if it be 
thought best ; punish discussion by summary administration 
of Lynch law, if you will ; deny, if you choose, all appeals 
by which the constitutionality of prohibitory laws may be 
tested. But that must exhaust your power, and more than 
exhaust the rightful exercise of any power under the law. 
But you cannot be permitted to control free discussion within 
the limits of a free State, nor have you any right tu hold that 
discussion aggressive. 

■Wby, sir, the institutions of freedom are not discussed 
more fearlessly and boldly and uncompromisingly at the 
North, than the practices of slavery arc at the South. I have 
a letter beforo me, published by Colonel Jacobs in a Mary- 
land paper, to which I intended to make reference. He dis- 
cusses what he calls the " white shivery " of the free Suites. 
No one objects to it. Let the '■ holy institution," the " or- 
dinance of God," bo discussed. Let the curse of labor — of 
free white labor — be exposed. But while the Sduthcrn slave- 
bolder talks, the Northern freeman will not remain dumb. 

Sir, the Missouri compromise was the result of a political 
Contest, in which the South gained a victory — as she always 
has — by the faithless action of Northern men. But when 
Missouri had been gained, and Arkansas was secHred, and 
all the benefits derived to the South which that line had 
promised, nothing was left to freedom but the unsettled re- 
gions of Nebraska and Kansas. The wicked attempt to take 
from the free laborer the right to live upon that soil, and to 
work for himself and for his children without the contact and 
the Uiiut of slave labor at his side, was an aggression upon 
the North, and upon the free institutions of the land, which 
Elands out in unapproachable meanness upon the annals of 
our Congressional history. No wonder th.it, from the polit- 
ical turmoil of that legislation, the Republican party sprang 
into existence. One leading idea compelled its formation. 
Such has been the case at all times. Parties cannot be forced 
into life, niey grow themselves out of events, aud because 
the people call for them. 

So it has been with evcrj- party formed since the founda- 
tion of our Government. The Federalist, tho Democratic, the 
National Repubhcan, the Whig, the Free Democratic, the 
Aflti-Masonic, the American, and now the Republican, have 
rested mainly, each in turn, upon one distiiiclivo principle. 
When a party has gained power, and has tho responsit'ility 
of conducting the Government, it must adopt a certain 
course of policy. Tho platform of the Republican party is 
simple, comprehensive, and national. It proposes to restrict 
slavery, and to administer tho Govornmi lit upon principles 
nationalized by its ablest statesmen. Democratic suecesB is 
slavery extension. The Kan.sas bill of Judge Douglas, and 
the Dred Scott decision of Judge Taney, cover the ground. 
We have been asked, why should wo restrict slavery? The 
answer has been given over and over again, because it is 
wrong in itself, because it is the source of wrong in others, 
because it is a blight upon the laud which tolerates it, bo- 
cause it justly brings our nation into reproach, because it is 
against the spirit of our Constitution and the policy of its 
fnuners. You .^av, restrain slavery within its present limits, 
and it must die" Very well ; let it die. VTliy should we 
contribnt(i of our subpt^ince to preserve its life ? But you 
say, further, with singular inconsistency, let us alone. 
What has the North to do with slavery? Why do you 
discuss it in pulpit and in pew and in parlor, in Senate and 
in street? If it is a curse, it afflicts us, and not you. 

Stop there. If you are content to let slavery remain where 
it now is, the terrible irony of the question might go without 



robuke. But you arc not. You press it upon iw. Senator 
Douglas opens the Territory ; Judge Taney curries in the 
slave ; rresideut Butluaum lurbid.s us to say ho must coine 
out. Anil yet, you demand to know what Iho North ha.s to 
do with lilavory. This Territorial policy of the new Democ- 
racy opens to the North the whole question of slavery. We 
mu.sl discuss it. You demand to know what the North has 
to do with slavery. 

In the time remaining to lue, my answer must be concise 
and brief. I had hoiked to discuss this subject more at 
length. Sir, slavery extension will give undue and oppres- 
sive political p*wer to the new StaU-3, to be exerted against 
tliti interest of every free Stiite. Vi'hy should the non-slave- 
hohling States consent that new Stales should bo made from 
free territory, where live slaves shall represent three free 
men in politiail power? The inequality of represontiition is 
now groat enough. We are now tlie otiicial associates of 
twenty geiilieiuru, and more than that, whose chairs would 
1)0 vacant here if it were not for the slaves of the South ! 
The honorable gfutlemim from New York [Mr. Cl.\rk] re- 
ferred, some time ago, to Uie fact that he represented on this 
floor the most wealthy constituency in thi; country. His 
constituents own ships and houses, slocks, manufacturing 
establishments, niiius, and banks. But they own no ne- 
groes, and Uierelore their property cannot give to them po- 
hlical power. With $1,000,000 in property, not one vote the 
more is created ! The humblest and jioorest freeman wields 
us great political power at the North ;4S the man who counts 
by miUions his vast possessions. One slaveholder, with 
$i,OtX),000 invested in slave property — valuing the human 
ch-itt»ls at $1,000 each — will represent the jiolitical power of 
SIX hundred men besides himself! That is to say, politically, 
this slaveholding millionaire reprosonls quite a Tiliago of 
true white lui-a "roiled into one." 

Now, sir, wc of the North can aoo no reason why this un- 
jjist ine(.iualily .should be increased by the croation from free 
territory ot slave States. Wiieu the subject of •' equalizatiun 
of representation " was first considered in Iho Cnuttitutional 
Convention, Mr Martin, of Maryland, in discussing this 
three-hflhs question, said : 

•' As hvc slaves, in the apportionment of Representatives, 
' wore reckoned as equal to three froemou, such a permis- 
' sion amounted to an encouragement ol the slave trade. 
' Slaves weakened the Union, which tho other parts were 
' bound to protect; the privilege of importing them wius, 
' therefore, unreasonable. Such a f..',luro in the Constitution 
' was inconsisleat witli tl»e principles of tho Revolution, and 
' dishonorable to tlie American character." 

Mr. Mason, during the same discuiision, remarked that — 

'• Slavery discourages arts and manufactures. The poor 
' despise labor when ix^rformed by slaves. They prevent 
' tho nniaigralu'ii of whites, who really enrich and strengthen 
' a country. They produce a pernicious eflect on manners. 
' Kvery master of slaves is born a petty tyrant. They bring 
' the Judgment of Heaven on a country."' 

Upon what fair ground are Northern men invoked to with- 
hold discussion? How can it be argued that the North hius 
nothing to do with slavery, when tiro Democracy of tho South 
would carry slavery into all the Territories, to bo at some 
future day organized uito slave States, with the political 
power now guarantied to them ? 

Mr. Chairman, the cxleusiou of slavery into the Territories 
will drive out from them free labor. Hut free labor comes 
ni.iiuly from the free States. Their men and women desire 
11 . conUict with the slave, or with the labor of the slave. To 
dishonor labor is to degrade them. Tins thing must not be 
done ; and it c-iunot be done, unle.ss faithless counsels and 
timid men shall make aiKJiher compnuuise, and secure for 
the interests of freedom luiother defeat. 

Sir, the tree Slates own the land within tho Territories, in 
common with the South. IJul if free labor is driven out, the 
value of Uieir lands is greatly reduced ; tlio standard of ed- 
ucation falls ; the material interest.s of tho people decline, 
■ and their moral condition is lowered. 

The honorable gentleman from Georgia [Mr. LovB] said, 
tlie other dvy, as I find his argument reported : 

" But I propose to test this moral question by another 
! f"!''- \. '.V''' "• ^. ^*-" ^'"° »hal '•I'" l>''St rule by which to 

i facilities 

Now, sir, 

-^ „ bo dis- 

putod, lor It IS the rule upon which is foundod every cfTort 

I" evangelize the woi'ld." 

Well, sir, let us apply tlial rule for a siugli* moment. I 
wit^h that I liad time to d.. so thoroughly. lii one small 
county in Ma.s.sachusctt.';— llampshiro county— where tho 
toUkl iwpulation, as given by Mr. Do How, w;ia, in 1850, less 
than Uiirty-six thousaml, while and colored, it appears from 
a report rco«!ntly published by tho American Hoard of Com- 
missioners of ihe Foreign ilissiou Society, that the contribu- 
tions to the American Hoard Irom that one county, during tho 
pxst yi'ar, were $«,'21U,40. 

During tlie soxne time, from fourteen 3l*vo States, inclu- 



ruiu. I oom a lo ue Uno that tho best rule by w 
' judge of tlie moral condition of any poople, is the fi 
' which that people have for roUgious instruction. Ni 
' I suppose that the correctuoss of this rule will not 



ding tho District of Columbia, the contributions to tho same 
Bjard are stated to be $S,1'.21.63 ; that is to say, the single 
county contributed to tliat cau.se within $1,90.'} us much as 
all tho.se States 1 Kacililies for instruction are be.sl detcrnilucd 
by results produced. 

la a volume which I find in our C>ngre.ssir>nal library, 
purporting to be written by the liev. Mr. Tower, the author 
inserts an extract from a report drawn up by a Southern 
ecclesiastical body. Here irt ihit testimony : 

" The iulluence of the negroes upon the moral and religions 
' interests of the whites is destruclivo in tlio extromo. Wo 
' cannot go into siiocial detail. It is unnecessary. We muko 
' our apiieal to uuiversil (experience. We are chained to a 
' putrid carcass 1 It sickens and destroys us. W» have a 
' miUstone hanging about tho neck of our society, to sink us 
' deep in the sea '(f vice. Our children are corrupliHg from 
' their infancy, nor can we prevent it. Many an anxious 
' parent, like the missionaries in fi>roign laiuLs, wishes hia 
' children eouM be brought beyond the reach of the corrupt- 
' ing inllueoce of the depraxtd Ittallum. N(ir is this iulluence 
' confined to mere childhooil. If that were all, il woul'l be 
' tremendous. But il follows into youth, into manhood, 
' and into old age. And when we Come directly into contact 
' with their depravity in tho iniinagemenl of them, then 
' come temptations, and provoc;ai(jns, and trials, that un- 
' searchable grace only can enable us to endure. In all our 
' intercourse with them, we are undergoing a process of in- 
' tellectual .»nd moral detorioration ■ and il require.s almost 
' superhuman eflorts to maint;iin a high stajiding, cither for 
' intelligence or piety." 

I olfer now, as bearing upon the moral and political aspect 
of this question of slavery extension, the following statistical 
proofs. But first, let me refer to the language u.scd by tho 
gentleman from Ceorgia, jMr. Lovk :] 

" As to the other point, whether slavery is a political evil, 
' I hold it to be legitimately discussable. Not tliat Congress 
' has any powur over it, but because, as yet, we .iro citizens 
' of a common country, and should consult together iu a 
' proper temper and spirit, as to what is best li)r us as a ua- 
' tion. If, upon a full in vesiigation of the facts, we of the South 
' should become satisftod that slavery is a great political 
' evil, it would bo our duty, as patriots and good citizens, to 
' get clear of it as .soon as possible. What is a political evil ? 
' 1 have given this suhjoet some reflection, sir ; ami the best 
' delinition which I can llx in my mind is, that a |iolitical 
' evil is something which, frr>m its very nature, must impair 
' our national reputation abroad, or Uiiuinish our malerLil 
' strength at home.'' 

Ttiat IS a fair and manly statement ; and I am content 
with the delinition of what is a " political evil," and ear- 
nestly commend the fullest investigation of the facL^;. 

Here is a statement taken from De Bow's Census, by Mr. 
Tower. It concerns rennsylvaiiia and Virgini.i. What 
cause has operated to elevate ihe one, and to depress tho 
material strength of the other ? If slavery has thus aR'ocled 
a Commonwealth like Virginia, which was the '■ Old Domin- 
ion," where God has lavished with unsparing hand His 
richest gifts of climate and of soil and of inland stream, has 
not tho North something to say when the master would loud 
his slave into our common lands? 

Virginia contain.<i 61 flWi .iquaro mllcfs. 

Ponn.sylvania contains JC'jOOO " " 

Both, at first, wore slave States. 

Virginia has a shore line of six hundred and flfly-fonr 
miles. IVnnsylvania has ocean access through n river and 
bay channel. 

wnrnt I'opuLATioN. 

J'tniiwtj/laiitia. Virr;x»in. 

1790 4J4,0'J9 44'"!,1I5 

1«00 fisn.094 5U.-2SO 

1R20 1 ,017,0<<4 6(»;{,087 

ie:!0 1 ,a0<),9i« 694,y<W 

1840 l.rtTfi.n.') 74i),S,'>;{ 

1S50 a,-.'6S,lii0 894,S00 

What has produced this result? 

There are in rnnulylvania 8,n'23,619 acres of improv<>d 
land. In Virginia there are 10,300,135 acres. 

Tlie average yield per aero iu Virginia is not one-liairthat 
of I'oimsylvania. 

nie average wheat crop in Penusylvania is 15 busholsper 
acre ; snd in Virginia 7 bushola. ' 

Tho aver:^;Q corn crop in I'ounsylvania is '20 bushels ; afid 
in Virginia 18 bushels. 

Tlie average rye crop in I'onnsylvania is 14 bu.shels ; and 
in Virginia 5 bushels. 

The relative value of land Is what junsl bo oxpocted from 
those facts. 

The vahio of Uio lmpnivo<l lands in PonusylTanla is 
$407,876,099 : and In Virginia, $210,401,543. 

The ten million acres in Virginia are worth lilllo more 
than half tlie eight million in Pennsylvania. 

Private property owned In Pennsylvania is $720,144,880 ; 
and in Virginia, $391,C4f.,430. 



I now offer some facts respecting sixteen free States, con- 
taining an area of six hundred and twelve thousand six hun- 
dred square miles, and fifteen slave States, containing an 
area of eight h\indred and fifty-one thousand four hundred 
and lifty square miles. 

These facts are collected, in part, from Mr. Pe Bow's Cen- 
sus and in part from Mr. Helper's book, which certainly 
contains much statistical information illustrating the ques- 
tion we are discussing : 

SrXTKES rKKK STATKS. FTFTEEN SI-A^■E STATES. 

I^opulalidn. 

•White 13,233,070 White 6,184,477 

Negroes 190,116 Free black 228,138 

Slave, 3,200,364 

1855. 

Tonnage 4,252,615 Tonnage 855,511 

-Exports .'. $167,520,093 Exports $107,480,688 

Importe $230,847,810 Imports $24,586,528 

Annual rrodutt—lSbO. 
Manufactures. . .$842,586,058 Manufactures. . .5165,413,027 

Invested $430,240,051 Investment $95,02t>,879 

Operatives 780,576 Operatives 161,733 

1867. 

Miles of railroads 17,S55 Miles of railroads 6,859 

1855. 

Bank capital $2SO,100,.'i40 Bank capital.... $102,079 ,000 

Whyclc Postage. 

Collected $4,070,725 Collected $1 ,.553,198 

Cost of mails 2,608,295 Co.stofmui]s 2,385,953 



Balance in favor of 
Department $2,0 62,430 



Balance against De- 
partment $832,755 



Massachusetts — 

receipts $532,184 

cost 153,091 

New York — 

receipts 1,383,157 

cost 481,410 

Pennsylvania — 

receipts 583,013 

cost 251,833 



Alabama — 

receipts S104 ,51 4 

cost 226,810 

Georgia — 

receipts 149,063 

cost 216,003 

South Carolina — 

receipts 91,600 

cost. 192.216 

1850. 

Public schools 62,483 Public schools 18,507 

Teachers 72,621 Teachers 19,307 

Pupils 2,769,901 Pupils 561,801 

I'ulilio libraries 14,911 Public libraries 095 

Books 3,888,234 Books 649,577 

1S50. 
Newspapers and periodicals Newepajicrs and periodicals 

published 1 ,790 pubUshed 704 

Copies yearly 334,146.281 Copies yearly 1,038,693 

Natii'e White AdulU—\SbO. 

riliter.ate 248,725 Illiterate 493.026 

Population 13,233,670 Population 6,184,477 

CSiurches, value.. §07,773,477 Churches, value. .$21,674,681 
1856. 

Patents issued 1,929 Patents issued 208 

CuiUrihuiitins — 1855. 

Bible cause $319,667 Bible cau.sc $68,125 

Tract cause 131,972 Tract cause 24,725 

Missions 502,174 Missions 101,934 

Colonizx^tioa 51 ,930 Colonization 27 ,618 

Jax<*-^1866. 
New York — North Carolina — 

acres of land.... 30 ,080 ,000 acres of land 32,450,560 

valued at... $1,112,138,136 valued at $98,800,636 

per acre 36.97 per acre 3.06 

The following facts are taken from original letters, which 
will be found in Helper's Crisis, and concern nine cities at 
the North and South, in 1856-'67 : 

NORTITEUX CmES. 

Name. Population. Wealth. Per capita. 

New York 700,000 $511,740,492 $731 

Philadelphia 500,000 325,000,000 650 • 

Boston 105,000 249,1 62,.500 1 ,510 

Brooklyn 225,000 95,800,440 425 

CincinnaU 210,000 88,810.734 422 

Chicigo 112,000 171,000,000 1,.V27 

Providence 60,000 58.064.516 967 

Buffalo 90,000 45,474,476 505 

New Bedford 21 .000 27 ,047 ,000 1 ,288 

SOUTinSHN cmES. 

Baltimore 250,000 $102,053,859 $408 

New Orleans 175,000 91.188.195 .521 

St. Louis 140,(100 63,000,000 450 

Charleston 60,000 36,127,751 602 

Louisville 70,000 31,500,000 450 

Richmond 40,000 20,143,520 503 

Norfolk 17 ,000 12,000,000 705 

Savannah 25,000 11,999,015 480 

Wilmington 10,000 7,850,100 785 

But, Mr. Chairman, if free labor is driven out from tJie 



Territories, and slave labor occupies its place, slave hws 
must be enacted to protect that labor and its owner. 

In tliat fact the North is deeply interested. The free col- 
ored citizens of Northern St.ates cannot travel in Southern 
Stat'i^s without danger of imprisrmmenl and .sale. I know not 
whether this is true in all the slave States ; but I believe ,1 
to be so. 

I have had occasion, quite recently, to feuow something ef 
the laws of Maryland in this respect. A free colored citjzeu 
of Massachusetts was imprisoned there for travelling through 
the State without the proofs of his freedom upon his per8cn. 
He was at the mercy of the law. After an imprisonment of 
two months, upon payment by his friends of the costs of 
his imprisonment into the treasury of Maryland, he was re- 
leased. While in jail, > ime friend induced the British con- 
sul to interfere for him, under the belief tliat the mau him- 
self was a subject of Grea. Britain. But the man, not know- 
ing that the paw of the British lion was a sure dofence, while 
the talon of the American eagle closed upon the victim, as- 
serted his true ciiizenship, and remained in prison until ths 
laws were vindicated and the prison door was opened. 

This may be necessary ; it may bo right ; the North can- 
not prevent it. But surely it is not hard to see -what the 
Nortli has to do with slavery. Why, sir, wo have every- 
thing to do with it, if the doctrine.'? of Jlr. Buchanan and tlu 
Southern Democracy are to be enforced. And because the'.r 
doctrines are claimed to be true ; because it is the purpoFJ 
of that partj', which now holds tlie power of this Goverr- 
ment, to enforce those doctrines, if thoy are permited to re- 
tiiin that power, this Republican party is hero now in Con- 
gress, and before the people, to declare what are the const.- 
tutional right.s of freedom, and wliat nAist be the constitu- 
tional restraints of slavery. 

Mr. Chairman, the Republican party, from the necessitieg 
of the case, must succeed, if it be not faithless to its«If. Th-3 
Soutliern Democracy will not be content until they have 
driven to the wall the entire conservative element upsoii 
which tliey have heretofore relied at the North. Every step 
they take, every arrogant dem.and they make, every new 
claim of riglit they institute and contend for, drives from 
their support an army of men at the North, and disconcert* 
and embarrasses at the South more than venture at tho 
present time to express their opinions openly. Why, sir, 
if every slave could be put afar cjtT, so that no discussicii 
could reach Iiis ear, and free discussion could bo hud, let us 
come among you, and stand upon your hill-sides, as you 
may stand on Plymouth rock, toannounce and to discuss and 
to demonstrate' political truths, and it would not be a twelve- 
month before, in nearly every Southern State, our KepublU 
can party would find more supporters than tho DciviocracJ 
of 1860 will find in its most favored Northern State. 

Mr. Cliairman, it has been declared hero, by some of tb" 
ablest speakers from the South, that the success of our 
party — which seeks to do nothing that may not be clearly 
done within the protection and under tho authority of that 
Constitution which they profess to admire and venerate— 
will compel them to withdraw from this Union of sovercigr 
Slate's. I have no desire to Ji.scuss a stitemont which alway . 
when made assumes the attitude of a threat. But Jo yoi 
not see, gentlemen, that to make such threat is to reude 
certain of success, beyond the peradvcnture of defeat, tbi 
party you threaten ? The Repuhlican party proposes to as 
certain whether the Union is not strong enough to sustain ai 
Administration which will rest upon the theory of our Con 
stitution, and upon the foundation which the fathers laid. 

You may shatter, if you can, this fair fabric of our free- 
dom ■ you" may make desolate tho temple, and strike down 
tho statue ; but the terrible responsibility shall rost upon 
yourselves. 

In the earlier ages of the world, within one of the ol 
temples of Memnon,a coloss,al statue had been erected ; an< 
it w.as said that daily, in the morning, as the rays of the su 
fell upon the image, sounds of sweet music went from it 
inspirit and to encourage the votaries at the shrine. But an 
Egyptian king caused the statue to be shattered and the 
miisic to be hushed, that he might find whence the strains 
proceeded, and whether the priests within tho temple had 
not deceived the people. Sir, upon this land our fat'ieri 
reared the.r temple, and within it the colossal statue of Lib' 
erty has stood. Not in the morning alone, but at high nooi 
and at set of sun, day after day, sounds of heavenly har 
mony have gone from it, calling upon the oppressed am' 
down-trodden to come and to be free. Rude hands hav 
been laid upon that temple ; hard Southern blows have fall 
en upon the sUitue ; but when, if ever, the power shall com' 
that will shatter the edifice and lay the colossal image low, 
in order that the mystery of the music may be revealed, il 
will be found, I believe, in the providence of God, that otherl 
hands will rebuild and reconsecrate them both ; but no 
Washington, nor Jefferson, nor Madison, nor Hamilton, nw 
such like artificers, will be commissioned for the work, untf 
tliat institution, which dishonors man and debases labor, am 
steals from the stooping brow the sweat which should ear] 
his bread, shall be forever overthrown. 
[Here the hammer fell] 






LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



011 898 274 5 



